Hi folks: I'm a fairly new editor but this is precisely the task force with which I'd like to be associated. I'm not sure what I should do now that I've found you and joined you. Your suggestions would be gratefully appreciated. You might cast an eye over my contributions to date (especially in the area of Ellery Queen novels, for which I've been creating pages) and let me know what you'd like me to do to bring them into alignment with your project. I'm inexperienced with markup so would love to have templates that I could use to help you when I make contributions. Accounting4Taste 05:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Welcome aboard. There are links to templates for articles in the right-hand column of this page, which sound like what you are looking for. Also, any articles that fit into this task force need to be tagged if they aren't already. The coding for that is on the task force front page, below where you signed up as a participant. If it's done correctly, you'll see a little symbol appear on the main novels project banner that says its part of this taskforce. I hope that helps. Silverthorn 10:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also welcome, I've had a quick look at the Ellery Queen articles and you have made a very good start. I have added a "Novels by" category and made a few other changes on the main pages and the talk pages. You might like to have a look over them and then look at the ArticleTemplate and StyleGuidelines pages. There are plenty of tagging activity to do, article de-stubification etc. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcomes. As you may have noted, I'm more interested in the older novels in this category. I've started on the task of bringing the entries I've been working on into line with the preferred format (infobox and the task force tag) -- mostly the novels of Ellery Queen and S. S. Van Dine. Do articles about mystery writers fall under the heading of this project? I'm also not absolutely sure what Kevinalewis meant by "Novels by" category. There's also one task that I've been putting off because I'm not sure how to do it, but I'm not sure if it falls within the boundaries of this task force. I want to combine

Donald Lam into a single new page, Cool and Lam, without losing any of the talk page comments. Any assistance or pointers to exactly how this process is accomplished would be, again, very welcome. Oh, and where exactly can I find a list of "tagging activity, article de-stubification" that you want done? I tried to find a list of these items but it seems to be subsumed within the more general category of lists that the novel task force wants worked on. Accounting4Taste 18:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Before anybody wastes a lot of time answering all of the above -- I think, to spare your time, I'll thoroughly investigate Patricia Cornwell and take careful note of exactly what it is you're doing and what tags, etc., you use to do it, and THEN ask questions if I still need to. But I could still use help combining Bertha Cool and Donald Lam into Cool and Lam. Sorry about the previous spate of questions -- just chalk it up to enthusiasm about getting started on this project. If there's a better way to learn the details than from Patricia Cornwell, by all means let me know. Accounting4Taste 19:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Novels by ..." see example below (however normally stacked one on the other!

{{DEFAULTSORT:Body Farm, The}} [[Category:1995 novels]] [[Category:Crime novels]] [[Category:Novels by Patricia Cornwell]]

"Detective, Crime, Mystery" novels and other prose should be tagged as part of the project.

"Hope that helps. I'll have a look at the merge issue. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the merge front - seems a reasonable thing to do - In terms of actually merge unless there is some thing admins can do I thing the only way would be to rename the main article and then manually blend in the text from the main article and the talk. I know that leaves the history log out in the cold but I don't know of alternatives. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some categories to the crime task force page -- for crime writers rather than crime novels, but still distinguished by country of origin. If this isn't the correct thing to do, please let me know. I suspect there may be more categories to add. Accounting4Taste 18:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are, but I'm not sure if "writers" should be within scope. Certainly the parent Novels project, focuses on the prose and the associated, characters, locations, etc and stops short of the biogrpaphies of the authors. That is more the realm of WPBiography. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point about the WPBiography project. The trouble is, there are crime writers like Ellery Queen, Craig Rice and Phoebe Atwood Taylor (to name some I've been working on recently) where the information on the detective character is built into the page concerned with the author. I suppose those would have to be split out into author and character ... a lot of work. And for, say, Phoebe Atwood Taylor, there's little information available about the author, which would make for a very scanty article. Your thoughts would be welcome. Accounting4Taste 16:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It occurs to me that, regardless of whether or not these pages collecting categories of writers truly belong to this project, they are useful -- I might start working on, say, Lord Peter Wimsey by going to the article about Dorothy L. Sayers (although I realize those are both quite well-defined articles already). I think I might find work to do for the task force by having these category tags on the page. Does this make sense? I don't mind deleting them if it's appropriate, no worries there. Accounting4Taste 18:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that bios of writers are probably outside the scope of this project. But the bibliographies of crime writers, I think, definitely are within. For the important authors it might even be good idea to have navigational templates that list the books similar to the one in Raymond Chandler. Henry Merrivale 03:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the subcategory Category:Crime fiction novels by author within Category:Crime novels at the same time decategorizing corresponding novels from Category:Crime novels. I think it helps to depopulate the mother category and keep it to the manageable size. As Kevinalewis pointed out to me, the fiction novel part of the cat name is redundant so I will correct it to crime novels by author. The reason for my stupidity is classification of authors: crime fiction vs. non-fiction crime. I also propose to create subcategory crime novel series. What do you think? If this is reasonable then it would be good if we could come up with the list of authors and series that are important, interesting, or just so numerous that they deserve it. Henry Merrivale 00:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Superb work, if you could ensure Category:Crime novel series is also sub/part of Category:Crime novels & Category:Novel series that would seem good to me. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 10:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, one thought. When placing authors categories within a genre based category you need to be conscious of their entire output. For instance, to my knowledge Agatha Christie wrote at least one Spy novel. If so then I would council keeping such an author in the wider Category:Novels by author in addition until all their output is covered by such genre categories. In this case they author would then be dropped down and in this example to Category:Crime novels by author and Category:Spy novels by author. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Crime novel series is up. Any suggestions as to what series deserve to be there? Henry Merrivale 10:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, no ideas currently I'll try and have a look a little later this afternoon. One thing the Category:In Death (Novels) appears to be a rather badly named cat., should it not rather be something like Category:In Death (novel series) with the disambig elements in lower case and clearly indicating the word series as many other series cats do. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 10:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is definitely of interest for anyone in the Short Story Task Force. An editor is going around removing books from the various short story-related categories. The rationale being given is that the book is not a short story. Yet the editor is not replacing the category with an alternative. And the categories themselves simply say "X short stories" - which should apply to collections as well as the individual pieces themselves. I've asked the editor to explain himself before I start reverting the ones on my watchlist. But I thought I would give folks a heads up on this. For an example, check the edit history of Saint Errant, a collection of detective short stories that have been removed from the related category. 23skidoo 11:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surely in this case the thing would be to replace Category:Detective fiction short stories with possibly a new Category:Detective short story collections (I'm not sure about the "fiction" element of this it is largely redundant). :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The other category in the example does a appear to be dispensable. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

also this probably should be discussed on the task-force talk page. And the debate maybe referenced here. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So moved. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually investigating further these have arrived under Category:Mystery short story collections by virtue of the Category:Short story collections by Leslie Charteris and is that not a more appropriate home than "Detective fiction". Just a question. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add my 2-cents, I didn't realize there was a substitute category created, so my "complaint" above was probably in error. Still, it's probably worth bringing to people's attention that there are some redundant categories out there. 23skidoo 12:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize that the Crime task force is part of the Novels project. At the same time, I've just learned that there is a category of mystery films and I'm wondering if a link might somehow be included within the Crime task force. I guess what I'm asking is, is this task force about crime, or about novels? Accounting4Taste 16:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The combination - strictly speaking, taking the lead from the parent project "Crime narrative fiction prose". But a few associated interests shouldn't harm unless they become the main focus. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Associated interests" -- very well put, and thank you. I ask because most people associate Charlie Chan or Boston Blackie with mystery films more than they do mystery novels (to give some examples). I will add a section on the main page called "Associated interests" (and of course if someone feels strongly about what this should be called, by all means change it or even delete it). Accounting4Taste 16:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The crime task force members may care to look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional amateur detectives, which is up for deletion. I want to add that I'm not encouraging anyone to have an opinion which matches/does not match my own, which is for deletion -- if there's a good point to keeping this list, I'd like to know about it so I can change what's left of my mind ;-) I just think that the more opinions we get, the better the final decision will be, and it occurred to me that this task force's members might have an opinion as to the utility of this list. Accounting4Taste 23:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My New Year's resolution, in Wikipedia terms, is to bring Ellery Queen to FA status. I've asked a couple of editors to give this article the once-over and let me know what might need to happen. If anyone in the Crime task force has comments to offer, they would be welcome (I think I'd find them fastest on Talk:Ellery Queen). Thanks in advance, and happy new year! Accounting4Taste:talk 21:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of
  a rubric
  , and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as
  described here
  .

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please

The list is currently here. Should it be also duplicated on the task force page? What do you think? and please join me in creating articles! Henry Merrivale (talk) 05:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently proposed to the

In addition, some of your membership may have an interest in the occult detectives subgenre. Those interested should please view my official proposal here, then please add to the discussion and/or sign your support for this task force's creation.

As I am not a standing member of your task force, please forgive my intrusion into your discussion area and direct any/all communication towards my talk page. Thank you. Hornoir (talk) 14:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Although our main focus is the literature itself rather that the in-universe character element (which wikipedia encourages as a focus - real world element that is!) I am sure you will get co-operation from here. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For clarity, my proposal (while under the name occult detectives) is meant to encompass not only the characters themselves but also the stories written regarding occult detectives and authors who made notable careers in the subgenre. I would have termed the task force Occult Detective Fiction, but I didn't wish to exclude films in the subgenre from the purview. Thank you for the reply. Hornoir (talk) 18:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The cry of 'Articles needed' (above) raises the question: what types of novel does this task force claim/disdain? When I look at the 'reds' on the lists of Edgar and Gold Dagger winners (ie novels for which there are still no articles), I find that the only three I own are by authors usually associated with espionage or thrillers. To be specific there is a Robert Littell story, along with two by Eric Ambler (the latter's works are very thinly represented on Wikipedia).

I will doubtless find time at some stage to take a look at these three omissions regardless, but it would be nice to know whether you crime guys feel this sort of thing is under your umbrella. Personally, I don't draw a hard-and-fast distinction between crime/thriller/mystery/spy stories. If there's an intrigue to untangle, I don't much care if it's a cop, a gumshoe, a spycatcher, a salesman or a nautical engineer who is caught up in it (Ambler's protagonists usually fall into categories like the last two). But I know that view is not universally shared. I am sure there are some crime fans who are horrified that John Le Carre was awarded his two Gold Daggers. Views?

Over time I should also like to take a look at Manuel Vazquez Montalban's series featuring the wonderful Barcelona-based gourmet gumshoe Pepe Carvalho. At least eight of these have been translated into English over the last 25 years (that is to say, I already have eight such editions on my bookshelves), and I have yet to find an article on any of them. Again, does this task force feel inclined to support work on translated authors? Grubstreet (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crossover is a bit of a problem, what I would say is that the scope is the place to iron this out. However crime scope would to mean mean, a novel where the main theme is criminal acts or activity, perpetration or fighting. Translated authors yes just depends if they are notable; and that probably mainly in the English speaking world!. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. Vazquez Montalban is considered important enough for there to be a WP biographical article about him (though I think this overlooks his placing at No 26 in The Times' 50 Greatest Crime Writers list in 2008), and his private detective is the subject of a reasonably lengthy WP fictional character article. So I doubt if there will be much of a notability dispute. The only pressing absence on WP is even the stubbiest plot synopsis of any of the novels, including the seven currently in print in English.

Re-examining 'Scope', I think most Ambler stories sit somewhere in there, even if the transgressions involved and the mysteries to be untangled are more likely to be a faked death, a coup d'état or gun-running (not necessarily crimes, technically speaking), rather than a heist – though he did arguably formulate the 'museum caper' genre with Light of Day, filmed as Topkapi. (The film has a WP article; the CWA Dagger-nominated novel does not!).

Looking further at the CWA lists, I can see that there are also a few Silver Dagger winners and numerous nominees that have no articles, including books that I have read and still have copies of by Liza Cody, Sarah Dunant, John Harvey and Peter Lovesey. Others are welcome to contend that certain CWA nominees are not crime/detection/mystery, but I think that I will adopt the view that a CWA commendation confers notability per se, and that these books are worthy of small articles. Whether they are recognised as 'crime' by Wikipedia is perhaps neither here nor there. Grubstreet (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a notice to let you know about